ReviewInternational journal of dentistry2019
Classification, History, and Future Prospects of Maxillofacial Prosthesis.
Review in International journal of dentistry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Analysis of Tear Strength Across Different Types of Maxillofacial Silicone Materials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Color Stability of Ocular Prostheses Subjected to Short-Term Tropical Weathering: A Digital Photography Analysis.Cureus · 2026Article
- Innovations Driving the Future of Maxillofacial Prosthetics, Part I: The Technological Leap in Maxillofacial Rehabilitation.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Effect of bisoctrizole addition on color stability after artificial aging and surface hardness of scleral acrylic resin: an in-vitro study.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Cross-lingual performance of large language models in maxillofacial prosthodontics: a comparative evaluation.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Review
- Bond strength of maxillofacial silicone to various three-dimensional printing resins compared to conventional substructures.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- From the Operating Room to the Dental Chair: Collaborative Prosthodontics in Craniofacial Rehabilitation.Cureus · 2025Article
- Automated design prediction for definitive obturator prostheses: A case-based reasoning study.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2025Article
- Replacement as an aging intervention.Nature aging · 2025Review
- Sticky Bone: Advances and Applications.International journal of nanomedicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Tear Strength of Two Platinum-Based Maxillofacial Silicone Materials: Siloczest LSR With and Without the Addition of 2.5% Zinc Oxide (ZnO) Nanoparticles and Technovent (m511)-An In Vitro Study.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2025Article
- Novel Approaches for the Treatment of Maxillofacial Defects.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Treatment Complications of Head and Neck Cancers and Rehabilitation Measures: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Application of Digital Molding in Maxillofacial Prosthetics: A Narrative Review : Application of Digital Molding in Maxillofacial Prosthetics.Galen medical journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review presents a classification system for maxillofacial prostheses, while explaining its types. It also aims to describe their origin and development, currently available materials, and techniques, predicts the future requirements, and subsequently discusses its avenues for improvement as a restorative modality. A literature search of the PubMed/Medline database was performed. Articles that discussed the history, types, materials, fabrication techniques, clinical implications, and future expectations related to maxillofacial prostheses and reconstruction were included. Fifty-nine articles were included in this review. Maxillofacial prostheses were classified as restorative or complementary with subclassifications based on the prostheses finality. The origin of maxillofacial prostheses is unclear; however, fabrication techniques and materials have undergone several changes throughout history. Currently, silicones and acrylic resins are the most commonly used materials to fabricate customized prostheses. Maxillofacial prostheses not only restore several types of orofacial defects but also improve the patients' quality of life. Although the current clinical scenario concerning the field of maxillofacial prostheses is promising, improvements in material quality and techniques for maxillofacial prostheses may be expected in the future, to produce better results in the treatment of patients.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.